Porter v. . Noland Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Porter v. . Noland Co.

2 S.E.2d 853, 215 N.C. 724, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 358

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided May 31, 1939·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

An examination of the record discloses that there was competent evidence to support the findings of the Industrial Commission. Therefore, in accord with the provisions of the act and the uniform decisions of this court, the findings of fact made by the Commission must be held conclusive on appeal and not subject to review. Hildebrand v. Furniture Co., 212 N. C., 100, 193 S. E., 294; Lockey v. Cohen, Goldman & Co., 213 N. C., 356, 196 S. E., 342; Davis v. Mecklenburg County, 214 N. C., 469; Lassiter v. Telephone Co., ante, 227.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

An examination of the record discloses that there was competent evidence to support the findings of the Industrial Commission. Therefore, in accord with the provisions of the act and the uniform decisions of this court, the findings of fact made by the Commission must be held conclusive on appeal and not subject to review. Hildebrand v. Furniture Co., 212 N. C., 100, 193 S. E., 294; Lockey v. Cohen, Goldman & Co., 213 N. C., 356, 196 S. E., 342; Davis v. Mecklenburg County, 214 N. C., 469; Lassiter v. Telephone Co., ante, 227.

Judgment affirmed.

Porter v. . Noland Co., 2 S.E.2d 853, 215 N.C. 724, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 358 (N.C. 1939).

Pincite

2 S.E.2d 853 (Porter v. . Noland Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related